Courtney Swink1, Caitlin Newton1, Cody Diehl1, Jordan Moses2, Jordan Hicks2, Keston G. Lindsay2, J. Jay Dawes1 1Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma; 2University of Colorado, Colorado Springs

Many law enforcement agencies, fire departments and military branches often require members to complete a muscular strength and endurance physical fitness test for entry or as a yearly test to assess their ability to perform essential job duties. Sit-ups are common components of a muscular fitness assessment, especially in tactical settings. These tests require a certain level of muscular strength, however, the level of strength needed to be successful in essential job duties is widely debated. Because multiple raters are used to test large groups, scoring inconsistencies can occur due to of a lack of proper movement standard knowledge between raters. PURPOSE: The primary purpose of this study was to evaluate interrater reliability of the Sit-Up test using video motion capture application across a group of fitness professionals and health science students. METHODS: Data collected from 24video raters (males, n = 10; females, n = 14, age: 26.25+3.15) was analyzed to determine the interrater reliability for the sit-up test. Raters were recruited from health science courses at the university where this study was conducted. Raters were shown 10 different video recordings of individuals performing the sit-up test as a group in a classroom. Raters were instructed to score the performance of each video participants based on the testing procedures and criteria that were provided. RESULTS:A Cronbach’s alpha reliability analysis of the entire sample revealed a high degree of interrater reliability for the sit-up test. (α = .925). CONCLUSION: Based on the results of this investigation, it appears that the sit-up test can be assessed by different raters with a high degree of reliability. These findings are significant for populations, such as military, fire and police, that frequently perform these assessments as part of their yearly evaluations.

This document is currently not available here.